Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread

[mediumsizered]

Where's my cake?

In the usual spot in the Mod's Lounge, under lock & key. Good luck in getting to it.

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

Not worth it.

 

[mediumsizered]

Agreed. It can get quite ugly in there when there is cake.

 

[ferrisb]

It's unfortunate that all we have, is to rubbish these commentators.

Not because many don't deserve it, but unfortunate that's the quality either being sought after, or simply the best that's out there.

Is it our fault that we've asked for this new 'humour' that seems to permeate into every broadcast call and on the airwaves in general?

There has to be a better way. Maybe we've all just forgotten what it can be like.

This is part of a bigger problem in society - the cult of personality. A famous person doesn't have to say something intelligent, they just have to say something for it to be newsworthy.

In football this is manifesting itself as presenters talking more about themselves than the game; coverage filled with inane personal anecdotes and manufactured tension between commentators. No one I know asked for this, yet this is where we are.

I could listen/watch multiple games of footy a week, but I don't give a flying **** about what Luke Darcy had for breakfast, what colour pants BT is wearing or how Eddie's hair is messy.

Here's a tip, footy commentators; why don't you talk about the BLOODY FOOTY!?!?

/rant (for now)

 

[thylacine60]

Thought it was the Blues style of play that was to blame for the drop in Friday night ratings last season?

Channel 7 certainly made a case for it so they didn’t have to look at their AGrade line up of BT, JB, Darce and Lingy with Duck on the special comments as a possible cause for people tuning out.

Scroll through the game day threads from last season and I have added #commentatorcalls to quotes of some of the most ridiculous things said during the coverage. There is plenty of material to work with.

heard cornes suggest someone was performing well in the air airily the other day........

 

[thylacine60]

Agreed. It can get quite ugly in there when there is cake.

the clique & cabal units send their most tenacious representatives in when it's cake chop-up time.........

 

[thylacine60]

This is part of a bigger problem in society - the cult of personality. A famous person doesn't have to say something intelligent, they just have to say something for it to be newsworthy.

In football this is manifesting itself as presenters talking more about themselves than the game; coverage filled with inane personal anecdotes and manufactured tension between commentators. No one I know asked for this, yet this is where we are.

I could listen/watch multiple games of footy a week, but I don't give a flying **** about what Luke Darcy had for breakfast, what colour pants BT is wearing or how Eddie's hair is messy.

Here's a tip, footy commentators; why don't you talk about the BLOODY FOOTY!?!?

/rant (for now)

once you have appeared on television or film - even once - you magically become a source of information and worldly advice far beyond the mere mortal.....

 

[JustaBattler]

It's unfortunate that all we have, is to rubbish these commentators.
Not because many don't deserve it, but unfortunate that's the quality either being sought after, or simply the best that's out there.

Is it our fault that we've asked for this new 'humour' that seems to permeate into every broadcast call and on the airwaves in general?

There has to be a better way. Maybe we've all just forgotten what it can be like.

Philosophically speaking- all sport is a form of 'bread and circus' is it not? Entertainment based on watching a rules based stylised physical confrontation(s). At a simplistic level sport is a celebration of a manufactured contest which finds its resolution through competition - mostly physical.

People seem to embrace the jingoism associated with such events and those who seek to profit employ base mouthpieces as commentators whose delivery is monitored by PR/Marketing data and kept vaguely in line with audience ratings as proxies for market demand. The reach extends to some sort of nonsense linking a game and a national celebration of 'fallen soldiers' - as if there is some link between the calamity called WW1 and a piece of entertainment called AFL - disgusting to me one many levels - but the world is what it is.

Just like societies get the government(s) they deserve -so do sports watchers get the commentary they want.

 

[thylacine60]

try talking non-stop on any subject and see how smart you end up sounding - you trip up - there are few very good commentators, just poor and worse....

 

[ferrisb]

once you have appeared on television or film - even once - you magically become a source of information and worldly advice far beyond the mere mortal.....

I have been on TV before and no-one listens to me*

*Nor should they

try talking non-stop on any subject and see how smart you end up sounding - you trip up - there are few very good commentators, just poor and worse....

To me, it's about intent not competency.

I am not asking for flawless commentators, trip ups are fine (and expected). But I want my football commentators to talk about football. Not themselves.

I have been part of presentations and panel discussions not too dissimilar to a football show discussion. I am a competent and mildly amusing - but not spectacular - public speaker, but at least I would stay on topic.

 

[ferrisb]

Made me think of this...

 

[Gethelred]

try talking non-stop on any subject and see how smart you end up sounding - you trip up - there are few very good commentators, just poor and worse....

That's part of the problem, the notion that commentators have to talk nonstop, or that they have to say something, anything, to validate their position. If you're talking radio commentary, sure; difficult to rely on the game speaking for itself there.

For a TV commentator, they need to be able to let the game unfold, without prejudice for what occurred before or what will go on after. You don't need to hype up Dustin Martin, he'll play fine without it and he'll do s**t you won't believe without you hyping the s**t out of him before the match; ditto, you don't need to ponder philosophically about whether Carlton (or Melbourne in 2013, which is when this particular gripe began) deserve to be exposed to their fans on free to air television, you don't need to talk up flag chances or lack their of, you don't need to talk about extraneous stuff. All you need to do is allow the game before you to take precedence.

Call the game in front of you, and sometimes let the play speak for itself. If you see something that's interesting from a strategy standpoint, highlight it instead of using it to prove your intelligence; rely on the viewers to make up their own mind, use their heads. Do not condescend to us; there are waaaay more fans of the game than commentators, and we're a pretty knowledgeable bunch at times.

Know the player's names!!!

Don't reach to other sports to obtain an analogy or a metaphor; reach within our own sport. Use your knowledge of the game. Get editors/producers who are capable of telling ex players/coaches to shut the * up, who can teach these people the art of broadcast calling without allowing them to get off easy. I suppose that's the issue, really; the broadcasters are so relying on the names/stature of those they hire that they are concerned if they stop them or go too hard they lose that person, and then that person goes to an alternative format. I do not believe that the ex players hired - Nick Riewoldt, Cameron Ling, Luke Darcy, Matthew Richardson - have nothing to offer; they've been captains, leaders. They've attended strategy meetings, talked and been within football systems for decades. But put Ling or Darcy behind a camera and get them to call the game, and they're pointing out the wrong things, talking the wrong way, relying on their viewer's ignorance or at least that the play will move beyond their most recent call (or each other for support: "Good call, Lingy!").

I don't disagree that they get a bum rap at times, but with more journalists publishing more stuff, more AFL media than ever before, more calls, more hype, more nonsense, it's a shame that commentary has fallen off the cart and has been allowed to languish to the degree that it has. It's the accompaniment to a masterpiece; why would we let just any old bloke on a fiddle ruin Vivaldi?

 

[HARKER]

I get back to asking whether this is what we wanted, or simply regardless of what is delivered, we'd willingly soak it up?

I somehow don't think that most having this discussion here, care for the fluff that's being broadcast but maybe...maybe, many do.
Surely if it wasn't wanted, networks would receive volumes of complaints and find a new delivery method for the calling of games.

Maybe there's a bit of chicken and egg about this, but really.......the end result is fowl (foul)
Foul because it's somewhat sad that the stupider things get, the more stupid we see. Off to the SRP board I go...

 

[thylacine60]

Antonio Vivaldi = Lygon Street

 

[goreds]

I get back to asking whether this is what we wanted, or simply regardless of what is delivered, we'd willingly soak it up?

I somehow don't think that most having this discussion here, care for the fluff that's being broadcast but maybe...maybe, many do.
Surely if it wasn't wanted, networks would receive volumes of complaints and find a new delivery method for the calling of games.

Maybe there's a bit of chicken and egg about this, but really.......the end result is fowl (foul)
Foul because it's somewhat sad that the stupider things get, the more stupid we see. Off to the SRP board I go...

The young ones, 'under 30' require more during a broadcast, as in voices calling the game and the banter that goes on with it. Because of their lack of attention span. The Richie Benauds of the world just wouldn't get gig now days because of their lack of 'flare'. These legends had something that can't be taught, timing and pause...

The game today needs these commentators, why, because the game doesn't have enough 'moments' to support itself, its become too vanilla for its own good and the League knows this hence the rule changes.

Test cricket, one day cricket is in trouble, 20/20 getting bigger because of the 'moments' it produces in a short time span...

 

[Gethelred]

The young ones, 'under 30' require more during a broadcast, as in voices calling the game and the banter that goes on with it. Because of their lack of attention span. The Richie Benauds of the world just wouldn't get gig now days because of their lack of 'flare'. These legends had something that can't be taught, timing and pause...

The game today needs these commentators, why, because the game doesn't have enough 'moments' to support itself, its become too vanilla for its own good and the League knows this hence the rule changes.

Test cricket, one day cricket is in trouble, 20/20 getting bigger because of the 'moments' it produces in a short time span...

I'd argue that you're essentially making the same mistake as the people who make these products - and they are products rather than sports - are making.

You, and they, are looking at the sport from a marketer's perspective; how do we bring more fans to the game? How do we make the game more popular? Their answer is to make the game more itself, hence AFLX/T20; more scoring shots, more goals, more catches, more runouts, more more more more more! Always more! You, at least, are also coming at it from the standpoint that you love the game, or at the very least a team within it; most of the marketers of the sport do not possess the same affection or respect for it, and have no compulsion to try to preserve certain aspects of the game. So, a night Grand Final, commentators who bring the banter and the 'wow' factor; cheerleaders and fireworks and music between the overs or while a ball is fetched back from the crowd. What's League doing? What's Gridiron doing? What went on at the Superbowl, and more importantly, how can we best use it to exploit our fanbase to make money?

You - and they - are either looking at the sport and seeing nothing of merit, or looking at young people and seeing no ability to care or possess passion for what you are passionate about. This is a huge irritation of mine, because the old forget what youth was like, how instantly passionate you can be about something you enjoy. You think the crowds that fill the MCG these days are all above the age of 45?

AFL and test cricket is fine, without the bells and whistles. Test attendances are up in India and South Africa (and New Zealand)while our team might be terrible the attendances are okay considering, and test match cricket never has poor attendance in England and Australia anyway, nevermind the most recent broadcast deal for more money than ever before. AFL is bigger than it ever was, and this is as much in spite of the bullshit that surrounds the game these days as because of it.

 

[thylacine60]

we stick with australian rules regardless of the administrations attempts to geld it because there is no option - few turn to other sports - we are weened on it and stick to it tenaciously because it is the greatest game in the world and it just might survive the latest series of turnip-brained dolts that oversee it

 

[mediumsizered]

The young ones, 'under 30' require more during a broadcast, as in voices calling the game and the banter that goes on with it. Because of their lack of attention span. The Richie Benauds of the world just wouldn't get gig now days because of their lack of 'flare'. These legends had something that can't be taught, timing and pause...

The game today needs these commentators, why, because the game doesn't have enough 'moments' to support itself, its become too vanilla for its own good and the League knows this hence the rule changes.

Test cricket, one day cricket is in trouble, 20/20 getting bigger because of the 'moments' it produces in a short time span...

Your reference to Richie Benaud is so valid. I would add Alan McGillvray & the BBC's John Arlott, who were predominantly radio broadcasters, but knew how much information was enough. From a football perspective I would throw in the ABC's Doug Mason, whose match commentary which we heard through The Winners program was probably the benchmark for TV football commentary.

I put a fair bit of the blame for the current poor standard of football commentary at the feet of Rex Hunt whose calls on 3AW degenerated into farce & became more about him & his profile than the game. I remember listening to one of our games on the radio in about 2006/2007 being called by Rex Hunt (the game wasn't broadcast on TV in Brisbane hence listening to the radio call) & I actually turned off the radio before half time because I could not make head nor tails of what was going on. Hunt was too busy screaming players nicknames & not describing who had the ball, what part of the ground the play was at & ultimately who was kicking the goals.

Nowadays I watch all of our games with the volume turned right down. The game is more tolerable this way.

 

[Jabba73]

Martin Tyler calls soccer and Phil Ligget called cycling the way you want our game to be called. Knowledgeable, succinct, a little flair when warranted and more importantly the ability to shut up and let the pictures speak for themselves.

Our current crop of AFL callers are afraid of silence, instead of embracing it.

 

[thylacine60]

jason bennett - message ends

 

[ESKIE]

Howard Cosell

 

[AT97]

Your reference to Richie Benaud is so valid. I would add Alan McGillvray & the BBC's John Arlott, who were predominantly radio broadcasters, but knew how much information was enough. From a football perspective I would throw in the ABC's Doug Mason, whose match commentary which we heard through The Winners program was probably the benchmark for TV football commentary.

I put a fair bit of the blame for the current poor standard of football commentary at the feet of Rex Hunt whose calls on 3AW degenerated into farce & became more about him & his profile than the game. I remember listening to one of our games on the radio in about 2006/2007 being called by Rex Hunt (the game wasn't broadcast on TV in Brisbane hence listening to the radio call) & I actually turned off the radio before half time because I could not make head nor tails of what was going on. Hunt was too busy screaming players nicknames & not describing who had the ball, what part of the ground the play was at & ultimately who was kicking the goals.

Nowadays I watch all of our games with the volume turned right down. The game is more tolerable this way.

Don’t remember Doug mason, could you be referring to Doug Heywood?Heywood was great game commentator. Only recently watched the ‘82 grand final with Heywood and Tim lane commentating. It was a fantastic call.

 

[Arr0w]

Mark Nicholas

 

[Gethelred]

Mark Nicholas

Can't stand him. Obsequious, simpering and excessively verbose.

Give me Harsha Bhogle any day of the week.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

Martin Tyler calls soccer and Phil Ligget called cycling the way you want our game to be called. Knowledgeable, succinct, a little flair when warranted and more importantly the ability to shut up and let the pictures speak for themselves.

Our current crop of AFL callers are afraid of silence, instead of embracing it.

I was devastated when SBS moved Phil Liggett and Paul Sherwin on from calling Le Tour (although Sherwin recently passed away).